Macca

Again, a very good team but premiership worthy? Can't see it and history tells us that we never really were a serious challenger for the flag So the Reverend did about as well as anyone could have given the lack of A & B+ talent The backline just wasn't anywhere near strong enough but as individuals, they ranged from solid to reasonably good to quite good Compare that backline to our current backline ... poles apart Midfield compared to our current 7 rotated midfielders falls short too. But the Daniher led midfield wasn't too shabby I'd have the forward line though .... easily better than our current set-up Put that forward line into our current team and I'm not sure we'd lose many games at all Talent is the key but before you have that talent you need a great recruiting team ... and that's what we have now So the future under Goodwin looks rosy. I like that we may be going after another possible future star in Harley Reid ... it tells the football world that we are not going to sit back. We aim to get better

Thanks Werridee, you've done well That's quite a good team and because we have fond memories of all the players you've listed, it's hard to do critical analysis All the players when playing at their best, were all very good But where we fell down was when we were up against other teams of similar ilk (you win some, you lose some) and then when up against teams who at their best, were superior For instance, in '87, Carlton was a tremendous team as were the Hawks In '88 we managed to get past teams around our mark but the Hawks were waiting for us in the GF Cats & Hawks were both really good in '89 and it all came together for the Pies in 1990 Hawks again (and the Eagles) were better teams in '91 So we were a very good team but not quite good enough But extremely well coached So ... if we insert May, Lever, Petracca, Oliver and Kozzie into that team, the team suddenly can take on all comers Who goes out, Werridee? haha

We were always 5 or 6 good players short of premiership standard during the Northey & Daniher era's so to play in so many finals series was quite an achievement We won our fair share of finals during both era's but made it to 2 GF's with a 14 & 8 and 13 & 9 records. A remarkable effort really Our midfields were never strong and the backlines were iffy We punched above our weight Go back and have a look at the Hawthorn lineup of the 80's and the Lions & Bombers line-ups in the 2000's Miles better talent wise. Streets ahead in fact Now with the current team our only real weakness is in the forward line ... but that can be rectified with a medium sized forward line (Petracca, Melksham, Fritsch) with Kozzie & Chandler buzzing about along with 1 of the 2 talls firing (one can do the bollocking work/decoy work) We'll need to hit up the forwards and the forwards will need to create separation but again, that's entirely possible Our backline & midfield is supreme And by the way, we had to play David Williams as a lead up forward as we didn't have anyone better ... as it was, he did very well, all things considered But Williams at FF wasn't the issue anyway ... the Hawks were just a superior outfit when it counted As were a few other teams during those 2 era's

How about we jump out of the blocks against the Pies and lead by 6 goals at quarter time 60 points ahead at half time, 90 at 3/4 time and then we go on and win by 118 Grundy B.O.G with 9 goals

@Neil Crompton I reckon Smith was a great manager of men so the coach being more like a manager in our sport probably goes back a long way Further to the comparisons ... Interesting stat from the Northey era ... over a 4 year period ('87 to '90) we defeated the Hawthorn powerhouse 5 times And they had the best line up of players I've ever seen ... super strong in all areas of the field Great talent and top level coaching wins big in any sport ... but what is more important? Can great talent win without top level coaching? Possibly and maybe even probably Can top level coaching win big with an average list? I'd so no but it may have happened

Another way to size things up would be to compare the best 23 from the 3 era's (Northey, Daniher & Goodwin) Not forgetting that the lists were set up in some ways by Barassi, Balme & Roos A task for @WERRIDEE who would no doubt relish such an undertaking

Ha ha! Apologies my good man! I do find it hard to seperate the 3 aforementioned coaches as they were/are excellent coaches And there's probably been any number of other excellent coaches that had the one thing in common - a lack of quality players Ridley, Skilton & Big Carl fall into that bracket Laurie Fowler for instance reckons that Ditterich was his best coach and he played under Hafey & RDB

Deleted

Northey, Daniher & Goodwin all excellent coaches A number of variables including the strength of our lists and the strengths of the opposition lists Hard to split them but the premiership might have Goodwin marginally in front The major difference is in the recruitment on an overall basis ... these days we're always looking to improve an already top class list Where as in the Northey & Daniher era's, we seemed to stop short once we got to a B or B+ level The Hawks team during the Northey years were a superstar outfit where as in Daniher's time, the Lions & Bombers were far superior to our outfit One could argue that we really only arrived as a fully fledged contender in 2021 so for that year and the following 2 years, we've been a genuine contender under Goodwin 2 more genuine years of contending (as well as this year) and with it, another premiership, then Goodwin will be well and truly ahead But Northey & Daniher got the maximum out of the teams they coached ... add 4 or 5 top players to those era's and we would have tasted ultimate success in those days, in my view

If the MC's thinking is '4th' then that thinking can permeate through to the players We can drop 2 games and still finish 4th but we also may not want to put pressure on ourselves this far out Beat Richmond and the rest of it is on our terms (to a large degree) We could get to 3rd but 2nd would require a lot to happen in our favour including us winning out

Hunter only has the one hater ... same bloke moves from player to player and then absndons the hate once that player proves him wrong The effigy in the garage requires a different head from time to time

It's official We've retained the Ashes! The last day washed out!

I hope it rains like hell Let's not forget than rain/bad light saved England in 2005 for a vital draw Reciprical rights thank you very much!! Just rain, that's all I ask!!

Just my opinion but I'm nearly convinced that Kozzie is a midfielder/forward rather than a forward/midfielder His first half was dynamic and for centre square stoppages especially, he's the man ... so is Oliver obviously, but Clarrie is currently unavailable

Not unimpressive but nevertheless, a bit meh. Would have been a shock if we'd actually lost We've got a hole at CHF that needs to be filled ... but if Grundy comes in and Brown goes out I'm still not filled with confidence But otherwise, our overall game was reasonable good but not excellent. To be honest, I don't know what to make of it when considering upcoming QF's and the like We've qualified for a decent finals spot as such (as the buffer protects us) but the issue remains with the forward line connection being a complex one with no easy answer We are certainly in the mix with our W/L ratio In the end, happy to get the win

There's a decent chance that the whole weekend could be washed out ... heavy rain is predicted for Saturday and light rain (all day) on Sunday Bring on the rain!! But if we get play on Sunday, we might be on and off the field a bit anyway Just need to hang on and the urn is ours

To be honest it looks like they've got our measure. We'll do well to hold on to the Ashes We don't know how to bowl or set fields to their bazball batting and when we bat, they seem to have good plans against our batting For instance, apparently Broad worked hard in the winter to develop a decent outswinger to bowl against Marnus & Smith. And even though he hasn't been picking up their wickets consistently, he has worried both players to a point where both players have never really looked set (apart from Smith's big 100) They've bowled a lot of short stuff to Head and that's worked. As for Davey, it's just been a matter of bowling around the top of off stump. He needs a big score in the 2nd innings (at least 60 or 70) But the defensive fields are just making it easy for their batsmen (especially the new batsmen) ... all they need to do is push the ball to point or flick it to the leg to get off strike. We've made it far too easy for them

In some ways we are in that Saints, Doggies & North bracket of teams Back 10 years ago I believe we played all the 8 interstate teams away ... might have been 2013. Could have been 7 times but the Pies for instance only ever travel interstate 4 times a year. And they never go down to Geelong And for a long time most of our home games were against interstate teams That's changed somewhat but we could well do with another blockbuster game/event A few years ago we tried the opening round vs Geelong but I reckon we should try again vs Essendon (round 1) Can't be Carlton but if it's Geelong again, we run the risk of getting them at Catpark again in a return fixture Effectively if we do that we come under the AFL's attention with 3 blockbusters in the first half of the season and they might then see us in a different light. Worth a try at least

The play-in game looks likely and as a pragmatist and realist, I've accepted that likely occurance in advance Even though I can't really see the point of it all apart from us punters watching a few warm-up games But if it comes in there will be a realisation (after a time) that the games are just precursers until the top 6 have sorted themselves out (IMV) However, given the rest that the 5th & 6th teams will get, they may have a better chance of advancing further if they advance to the S/F's where they'd meet the losers of the QF's So in summary, the winners out of a new system may well be the 5th & 6th teams But again, we'd need a big sample size to see what eventuates So if a team from 9th or 10th advances to the SF week, what chance have they got against a top 4 team that has had a bye and has just lost a QF? At the moment that could be a team like the Giants @ Collingwood (assuming we smash the Pies in a QF ... hee hee)

The evidence says otherwise as just in the last 9 years alone, 13 of the last 18 elimination finals have been won by the 5th or 6th teams So what are the chances of the play-in winners when they are up against the 5th & 6th teams (that have been freshened up putting their feet up with their bye) Rest and recuperation are huge factors in our sport For instance, in a majority of our GF wins, we've had 2 full weekends off during the finals If we give the 5th & 6th teams a weekend off, their winning chances increases with (a) superior personnel and (b) a weekend off's R & R You might as well just make it a final 6 but for reasons outlined earlier, that won't be happening for a number of reasons. Not least of all the money that can be made from 4 precurser finals It should be remembered that for about 40 years, only a 3rd of the teams made the finals (4 from 12) Sometimes less is better So I'm not pro the play-in games but I wouldn't mind betting that they will happen sooner or later

So we agree As previously stated, the wildcard games would effectively help 5th & 6th and disadvantage 7th & 8th And right now, from an overall perspective, 5th & 6th are better performed teams than 7th & 8th and therefore better teams historically Aberration moments aren't the norm so disregard the Bulldogs GF victory. 20+ years of the final 8 gives us a body of evidence that 7th & 8th (especially) are making up the numbers And that was the jist of my previous post If we went to 6 finalists only we'd not have any (or many) teams that aren't really worthy but for the reasons I outined in thr previous post, only having 6 finalists creates other issues So that is not going to happen (final 6) So in historical terms as a general standard, 5th & 6th are better than 7th or 8th same as 1st & 2nd are better than 3rd & 4th same as 3rd & 4th are better than 5th & 6th But not every time (obviously)

Reality is that 7th & 8th aren't needed as only a rare abberation moment will see either team even make a PF Top 6 works so much better with just a total of 5 finals However, the season proper would lose a lot of it's interest if only 6 teams made the finals and the supporters need to see their teams getting some finals experience and more importantly, the supporters need to be fed hope So bringing in the wildcard card games effectively helps 5th & 6th whilst at the same time not helping 7th & 8th ... but why do we care about 7th or 8th if those teams aren't a realistic chance anyway? In effect the wildcard weekend would act a precurser or warm-up for the finals that matter ... same as 5th vs 8th & 6th vs 7th right now are games that effectively get rid of 2 teams who aren't a real chance Revenue raisers, precursers and preliminary games that in effect, wet our appetites for the real stuff

What's your claim to fame Neil? Haha 😁 (you can't be the real Neil Crompton unless you have special powers) Anyway, we're all hacks here compared to any player who even gets on a list Ain't that the truth

Yeah Tyson tried his best and was quite a serviceable player Did a lot better than any of us hacks